The Indians Have Beef

I missed this over the weekend, but the Indians are protesting their loss on Saturday to the Baltimore Orioles. What they're upset about is a run the Orioles were awarded with three and a half innings after it actually scored.

Confused?

So am I, so I'll let Buster Olney explain. From his blog:

The Orioles had runners at first and third and one out in the second inning. After Grady Sizemore made a diving catch of Ramon Hernandez's line drive, Nick Markakis tagged up and raced home. At the same time, Miguel Tejada was far off first base, and Sizemore threw to first and Tejada was doubled off -- but after Markakis crossed home plate. Markakis' run should have counted.

But home-plate umpire Marvin Hudson waved off the run. And the Orioles said nothing, at that time, as the Indians noted in their letter of protest.

Two innings later, Baltimore bench coach Tom Trebelhorn walked out on the field to talk to Ed Montague about the decision -- and in the sixth inning, the umpires ordered that a run be added to the Orioles' score.

Now, if you believe in fallacy of the predetermined outcome, then this run wouldn't have made a difference. The Orioles wound up winning, 7-4, and not by one run. But baseball games are like road maps, each turn leading to the next. Anybody who has watched baseball knows that managers and players will make their decisions according to the game situation, and the score always frames the game situation.

Now while teams rarely win their protests, Olney goes onto point out that the Indians probably should win this one. If not it sets a dangerous precedent for umpires who make mistakes calling a game in the future. What happens if an umpire sees a replay between innings of a home run he ruled foul, and then comes back out and says it was fair and awards that team with three runs?

Mass hysteria. That's what.

I'll admit, I think that Olney is worrying a little bit too much about this. He does have some very good points though.